Motorola DROID MAXX Review

0.phoneArena
09 Sep 2013, 04:20posted on

There are a few key differences between the Motorola DROID MAXX and the DROID Ultra – first the MAXX has a higher capacity 3500mAh battery to provide longer usage time, as well as 32GB of internal memory instead of only 16GB, and soft-touch coating on the back of the device. Because of these extra features, the Motorola DROID MAXX has a premium price of $300 with a 2-year Verizon contract, making it $100 more than the DROID Ultra. Are these extra features worth the price of the DROID MAXX? Let’s take a closer look...

This is a discussion for a review. To read the whole review, click here

Ridiculous pricing for a mid-range device with a large battery. Price considered, with this HW, the high battery drain as reported by several sites and the bad camera, this is about a 6.5 device - passable for better alternatives.

This phone has been in my possession for about two weeks. As a light user, I have been able to get 5 full days and 4 nights on a charge twice. Battery saver is turned on, active display turned on, google now is disabled as is the always on voice command. I also have some syncing turned on(three email accounts). I personally would call bunk on any of the supposed battery drain issues. The camera quality is a step up from the 2nd gen Maxx, which I also owned.

The phone feels amazing in hand, certainly better than any LG or Samsung I have held. The phone is extremely fluid. I initially thought ill of Moto for going 720p, now I see the logic. I do not believe hardware is currently there to support 1080p quite yet, maybe with Snapdragon 800.

I'd agree with that, it's all well making the 'experience' worthy, but when competitors are pushing substantially better hardware at the same price point, you have to wonder how much of that is justified.

I suspect we'll see biggish discounts fairly sharpish. Moto would sell a lot more if it was priced more to the mid range than top end. They shot themselves a bit in the foot after all the hype and build up with such a high price point at the end.

I've carried the gauntlet of Motos and they "ultra" reliable. I'm testing the S4 and after downloading the new Google keyboard, it is....fair. Resolution isn;t everything. The S4 won't stay on vibrate/silent! This could be both embarrassing and depending on the situation, quite problematic! It is this fault that I'll be returning the S4 today. I would prefer to have an SD slot, but I'll make due w/32G if it means my phone will STAY silent when I set it in that mode!

great phone- but Im just not seeing the 48 hours. Ive turned off active notification and tocuhless controls and im getting about 28 hours tops- Dont get me wrong a solid full day is nice, but I still have to charge it everynight to ensure I have a full day the next day.

The weight/size is also a little heavy so it makes 1 hand use awkward.

Ive been an android user for 4 years now, but Im thinking of making the jump to iphone :/ I need a great camera and do not want a galaxy so Iphone seems the way to go.

I have kept active notifications on, but also never enabled touchless controls or google now. I also make sure GPS stays off. As stated in an earlier comment, I have been twice been able to get five full days and four nights on a single charge with light using. Texting, light calling, and a few games of sudoku a day. Unfortunate your experience is so different, one suggestion I have is to enable battery saver mode.

The funny thing is BGR & Phone Arena said that the older RAZR\'s were awkward for one hand use, but the phones that they praise (S4 & G2) are both bigger & less one hand use friendly than the old RAZR\'s and the MAXX. I have the RAZR Maxx and S4 & have tested the MAXX; the latter feeling the most comfortable in my hand.

It's all about the bezel. The OG Razr had an enormous bezel for its size. I tried it when the phone first came out and found it uncomfortable to use compared to my Rezound which is also 4.3". The super-flat back didn't help matters. They improved hand-feel last year with the Razr HD and again this year. The Galaxy S3 and S4 have pretty thin bezels for their size, and the G2 blows everything else away, it's practically all screen (like the Moto X).

I don't really remember the moto X with the same hardware except battery being a standout in battery life. You might be able to make a case that current GPUs are more suited to 720p than 1080p, but that seems to be a performance rather than a battery issue.

I own the droid Maxx, and the rating is fairly correct, 8.5-10....However, if the same reviewer is going to give it an 8.5 after giving the lesser model Droid Ultra an 8.7 rating, there may be issues with that. Are these extra features not worthy of a 9.0, or at least 0.2 points higher to make it on par with the Ultra?

I suspect that if the Ultra were $150 and the Maxx $200, they would have rated the Maxx higher. I hate that reviewers take price into account so much, especially since Android phones often go on sale or drop in price so quickly. In the long run (a 24 month contract), $100 is peanuts.

I completely agree with you & jajones82 on this. It makes no sense that the Ultra has a higher score. At the very least, they should have the same score, but it makes more sense that the Maxx should have been rated higher. Motorola gives you 4 extras for your $100. Apple only gives you more memory for your $100. By this logic, the 32 & 64 GB iPhones should be rated significantly lower than the 16GB.

I also agree with your last point. I don't understand why people buy cheap phones on contract. You're paying the same monthly price regardless of what phone you get, so you might as well get the best phone available for the price. If I buy a $200 phone on contract, I end up paying $2400 over the life of the contract as opposed to $2300 over the contract for buying a phone that may not be future proof. The extra 4% is worth having the best available device.

And even without contracts, I think the extras of the Maxx are worth the $100 difference. Subsidized pricing screws up the value equation. If you look at paying $500 for a Droid (mini) vs. $600 for the Ultra and $700 for the Maxx, it's a much smaller difference than $100 vs. $200 vs. $300.

$249 for this phone if it had an SD slot would\'ve been a perfect price point considering the battery. The .2 drop in scoring doesn\'t make sense. Phone arena complained about the Ultra being a fingerprint magnet (which, I don\'t remember fingerprints on the BACK of a phone ever affecting the performance of a device, but yet they whined about it, a lot) but the MAXX is not yet they score it lower because of the price.

I consider the price premium over the Ultra, reasonable. $50 for both double the storage and extra battery life, seems about par for the course in my opinion.
I just wonder if the Ultra isn't priced a little high. The MotoX makes sense at $199 since they build it here, and with the proprietary SoC add ons. Yet the Ultra isn't made in the US, so why does it start at the same price as the MotoX? Then again, like someone else said subsidized pricing muddies things up a bit.

Hmm seems like a worthwhile investment to me in my eyes for a phone for real. Might just get the device and replace my own Razr 16GB with this one instead of getting the Ultra, even with the red color design they have for them.

Try the two phones, as a Razr owner I have a feeling you'll prefer the Maxx. It's only a bit thicker, but the soft-touch Kevlar has a much better feel. The Ultra is completely moot now that Verizon offers the Moto X for the same price. The real choice is Moto X vs. Maxx.

Best new Android, iPhone and Windows Phone apps

All content (phone reviews, news, specs, info), design and layouts are Copyright 2001-2015 phoneArena.com. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part or in any form or medium without written permission is prohibited! Privacy . Terms of use . Cookies . Team